Ken Explains it All - Lori & Ken Alexander - Part 3

[salex]

You all think way too highly of yourselves... a real pat on the back society.

I jumped on here to see what this Forum was all about and dispel some really ridiculous speculation about me and my family. I should have expected that once I dispelled the the major speculation and mischaracterizations that the venom would find other outlets. I am not so naive to think that angry people will be quieted by anyone man, let alone one who believes strongly in Biblical authority.

Keep having fun ... as I have zero expectations from this group whatsoever, and never have. You are very deceived if you think I thought I could match down with a bunch of angry and upset people. I can't stoop that low as I live by a higher standard and values. I guess I did have some hopes for some of you, and who knows, maybe a few of you will stop treating us as the enemy, because we are not.

Wow, did you find a flounce generator, because that is pretty much exactly what this sounds like.

Here's one I got from this website...

margalite.webatu.com/goodbye.html

Goodbye everyone, it's become clear that I can't post anything in this stupid forum without being the subject of ridicule and persecution without anyone even bothering to stop and wonder if they're being worse than the fluffies they pretend to despise. Negative commenters, in my opinion, are so wrapped up in their own lives and desires/needs that any idea, or posset that doesn't comply to those needs is an actual affront to them. I THOUGHT THIS COMMUNITY WAS FULL OF LOVE BUT I SEE THEY ARE FULL OF HATERS AND PEOPLE WHO JUST COMMENT, JUST TO INSULT A FELLOW MEMBER. After the last few weeks or so of posts (and the often aggressively and needlessly snarky comment storm that accompanies several of them), I feel that I must leave this community. You don't feel creative? Are your friends changing? Maybe life is different. Maybe that's good. Maybe you need to spend a few years alone. I'm dumping this group and you stupid fucks. The internet is a vicious, atrocious place sometimes, and most of you have played your part in keeping it that way. Thanks so much... you've done nothing for anyone tonight. You evil mudslingers don't respect God like we do :lol:

[latraviata]

Wow, did you find a flounce generator, because that is pretty much exactly what this sounds like.

Here's one I got from this website...

margalite.webatu.com/goodbye.html

Goodbye everyone, it's become clear that I can't post anything in this stupid forum without being the subject of ridicule and persecution without anyone even bothering to stop and wonder if they're being worse than the fluffies they pretend to despise. Negative commenters, in my opinion, are so wrapped up in their own lives and desires/needs that any idea, or posset that doesn't comply to those needs is an actual affront to them. I THOUGHT THIS COMMUNITY WAS FULL OF LOVE BUT I SEE THEY ARE FULL OF HATERS AND PEOPLE WHO JUST COMMENT, JUST TO INSULT A FELLOW MEMBER. After the last few weeks or so of posts (and the often aggressively and needlessly snarky comment storm that accompanies several of them), I feel that I must leave this community. You don't feel creative? Are your friends changing? Maybe life is different. Maybe that's good. Maybe you need to spend a few years alone. I'm dumping this group and you stupid fucks. The internet is a vicious, atrocious place sometimes, and most of you have played your part in keeping it that way. Thanks so much... you've done nothing for anyone tonight. You evil mudslingers don't respect God like we do :lol:

Oh dear.......poor leather strap using, toddler out of her bed yanking, godly leader.....what an ignoble descent, typical............

[Koala]

this will be my last post here if you are using my full name. Please change the header if you want me to return, and please change it even if you do not want me to return.

You have posted twice since you made this comment. The header remains unchanged. The red "X" is still in the upper right hand corner. It still leads to somewhere that's not here.

[geeklove]

You all think way too highly of yourselves... a real pat on the back society.

I jumped on here to see what this Forum was all about and dispel some really ridiculous speculation about me and my family. I should have expected that once I dispelled the the major speculation and mischaracterizations that the venom would find other outlets. I am not so naive to think that angry people will be quieted by anyone man, let alone one who believes strongly in Biblical authority.

Keep having fun ... as I have zero expectations from this group whatsoever, and never have. You are very deceived if you think I thought I could match down with a bunch of angry and upset people. I can't stoop that low as I live by a higher standard and values. I guess I did have some hopes for some of you, and who knows, maybe a few of you will stop treating us as the enemy, because we are not.

WWJD, Ken? Because this sanctimonious prattle doesn't sound very Christ-like to me.

[Koala]

Since it still hasn't been addressed (and since Ken is obviously unable to follow through on his promise to leave this Christless wasteland):

Ken wrote:

I saw you wrote something about this, but I have never sen it on Lori's blog or comments. I travel and the last 7 days I have been traveling, so if you have not noticed, I made ZERO comments on Lori's blog during that time. So to blame me for a hypothetical "shouda, woulda, coulda' on some comment because we did not respond teh way you wanted us to... is that fair????????? Is it even close to reasonable? It will become strange to police Lori's blog with your thinking in mind.

Ken, Ken, Ken....my goodness, do you think we can't read?????

Again, let me help you:

Post:

lorialexander.blogspot.com/2014/03/feminist-founder-changes-her-mind.html

You will note that this post was made on the 11th....the time frame during which you claim you were traveling and made "zero" posts. I am assuming by zero you mean 3, because that's exactly how many times you commented on that post. All but one of your comments were entered after "Lady Virtue" wrote the following:

A previous commenter said something about rape within marriage. How is it even possible for a husband to "rape" his wife?

This comment was totally ignored by both you and Lori, although both of you found time to answer subsequent posts.

Here are the replies you submitted that day:

Ken · 1 day ago

Your statistic of 75% is referring to the workforce in ONE mill in the United States. The women in these mills were mainly young, pre-married girls and the expectation was that they would soon be married and become SAHM's.

Yes, children died and that had some impact on the number of children born to a family, but there were many other reasons for large families back then.

Most importantly is that Lori is accurate in associating the era of feminism with working women, with 25% of women in the workforce pre-feminism and now 60% in the workforce. That sizable leap in working women can definitely be traced to to women being told to become much more like men, work, and be independent.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104673.html

Almost all of the progresses you name would have come about without the doubling of the percentage of women in the workplace. Progress may have been a bit slower, but I think many of us now wish that the 70's, 80's, 90's era's might have dragged on a few extra decades or centuries. Some of the progress you think is so great may only be accelerating the demise of the United States as we knew it.

What do we really have by way of progress that has added much to quality of life and relationships the last 40-50 years having been accelerated by more people in the work place? Fewer people in the work place would mean higher salaries for husbands to support SAHM's. Maybe without a big screen TV or I-Phone, but really have these things enhance quality of life much? Maybe, the knowledge that now abounds is fun,but relationships have been harmed by the technology.

Many women's lives have been put to work instead of having the joy of being SAHM's because of the great lie of feminism that a woman can have it all? I see it every day, and the horse is out f the barn and almost impossible to reset the current system. The lie has won and women have lost big time. If husband's were all making 35% more because of a smaller workforce, combined with the economic savings a SAHM provides, many more mom's would be able to stay home with their babies.

Ken · 1 day ago

Exceptions for women are acceptable and necessary. We can both name many exceptions for why some women must work and drop off their babies at Day Care to raise them.

BUT 60% of women working? This is not the exceptions... this is now the rule.

I see no reason why an unmarried woman should not work or get a degree, so long as there is no great debt in doing so, but once the first baby, or max second baby comes along being a SAHM should not be the exception but the rule for a myriad of good reasons.

Ken · 22 hours ago

No I was not clear that I support what you are saying, Sorry :).

I was just pointing out a few additional things that were not directly related to your comments after a long plane ride home :).

Ken wrote:

So you cannot accept at face value what I am saying?

You have been repeatedly found to be:

1) outright lying

2) contradicting yourself

3) giving inaccurate information

4) making up statistics on the stop to back up your position

5) failing to understand the meaning of words

Now why on earth would we take anything you say at face value???

[formergothardite]

I'm thinking this leaving might have less to do with his name being up there and a little more to do with him not being able to explain away his lies about not posting in the last seven days.

Koala, you deserve a gold star for driving him nuts by quoting him and Lori. He could not stand having both their words used to prove him wrong.

[salex]

I thought you'd left?

OK, how do I post a youtube?

ZMizriNz1rk

[Koala]

ZMizriNz1rk

:lol: :lol: :lol: Fucking door's broken

[FJismyheadship]

Ken has racked up 277 posts in the short time he has been here. It took me MONTHS to rack up that many. I think a person might hit 50 a month, but most newbies lurk more than post.

Clearly he spends far too much time on here. He also wants to see what everyone is saying about him, then feels compelled to answer anyway,

Those meanie Jingers. I'm not going back.

Wonder what they are saying now? I can take a peek. But I won't post.

Hey! How dare they say that!

(Internal struggle lasts until 30seconds)

OK I will post one last post. Last one, I promise.

[treehugger]

I've been here for over a year - and I have two posts more than Ken.

[Mecca]

I believe that common decency towards all people does not give me the right as a Christian to barge into their lives uninvited to share the love of Christ and Christianity, nor use it as a weapon against them. You want Christians to be considerate as to how they share their faith, but in turn you do not want to be considerate in how you force things upon others.

My response to raping a drunk women is that the rapist is at fault period. How the new commenter missed that I will never know. To be drugged is far different than taking the drugs oneself. There are two crimes committed if that is the case, but the caution to all young ladies remains to stay out of the dark alleys of life.

But in your illustration you now become the rapist, that is how it works. Even as I ask you "please stop." You are a hypocrite, and evil, if you continue doing something against what someone wishes and requests, and then blame them for it. That applies to rape and applies to this current situation. It is just an attempt at a different kind of harm.

You no longer want your mouse to play with... so I will be heading to better things to use my time. I do not live in fear, but yes, there are insane crazies out there that you have acknowledged, so now I get it: Women who are submissive and taken advantage of by dominating husbands need your protection, but others who you disagree with you welcome to throw to the wolves. You have two different standards for your life as to how you desire to protect people from the .00001% chance that they be harmed. And you actively participate in the harm and splash it all over many people without concern for all who may have my same name. A bunch of blooming hypocrites you are. Sad.

I have read a bit here in there during this whole thing and kept my mouth shut because I have a personal rule of not engaging with ignorant assholes. You, Ken Alexander, have got to be one of the biggest ignorant assholes on the planet after stating the above, but I could not let the above go unaddressed.

You can spare us the bull of saying you respect women. You do not. A male that respects women would never in a million years say "stay out of the dark alleys of life" to a woman or even hold that opinion. Never. That has got to be one of the most disgusting things I have read in a great while. And to think you have daughters and still say that. Disgusting and vile, you are. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You claim to say the responsbilty is with the rapist, but then you go on and say that women are actually responsible for their rape when you make that statement. And to compare you wanting your name removed from here, a name you and your wife have willingly put out there for years, to actual rape? Good grief. As someone that was raped, repeatedly, by a relative from the age of 3-8, how dare you even compare the two. Yeah, I guess my three year old to eight year old self should have stayed out of those dark alleys of life according to you, right? Your views are disgusting and so far removed from anything that Jesus would have said or done.

You are a sick, sick man, Ken Alexander, but I am glad you came here and exposed yourself for the disgusting person you truly are. Unlike that troll of a wife you got, we allow people to express their views without censorship here. Don't blame us because you are an asshole and hold asshole views and put those asshole views out for the world to see. I hope people google your name and see what you have said over and over. You have no one to blame but yourself when they find out what you really think about women and what type of warped views you hold. You and that nasty wife of yours -- Lori Alexander, you know, the monster -- are made for each other.

[Jezebel]

Jumpin' Jiminy Cricket. How did I miss all this?

Oh, I know--I've missed it because I tend to scroll past the Ken and Lori Alexander posts. They're both such depressingly horrid people who have such obvious contempt for each other, and are chained together in a prison of their own making. Lori's blog has always left me feeling icky and unclean after reading it--so I don't--and I've ignored most threads about her, too. And that's why I'm late to the party!

I came to these conclusions, by the way, based on Ken and Lori Alexander's own words. I couldn't read Lori's blog without quickly coming to see her as bitter and full of thinly-suppressed rage, and married to an asshole of the highest order. It's all there, for anyone to see.

Now, since I don't believe Ken's truly done with us, I'd just like to respond to his last comment before I go back and get caught up with his shenanigans here.

You all think way too highly of yourselves... a real pat on the back society.

Whenever someone has told me I think too highly of myself, it's always been someone who thinks I ought to be looking up to them, instead, and resents the fact that I do not. So to gain the upper hand, they try to knock me down, make me doubt myself, and make me question my own worthiness.

It's an old, tired trick, Ken. Maybe it works on all the cowed, subordinate women in your home, church, and business, but not here.

I am not so naive to think that angry people will be quieted by anyone man, let alone one who believes strongly in Biblical authority.

Yet you obviously came here, thinking you could quiet the critical Free Jinger crowd. And you don't seem to have much of a clue about how the Internet actually works. You have unrealistic expectations of privacy surrounding personal information you and your wife have voluntarily posted in the public sphere. You also believe your wife should be able to post controversial views in public, and only have them read and commented upon by people who agree.

That's pretty flippin' naive, if you ask me. Or maybe disingenuous.

Keep having fun ... as I have zero expectations from this group whatsoever, and never have.

Oh, Ken Alexander, you are lying like a rug! Even I can see you had plenty of expectations when you came here. Principally, you had the expectation that the members here would be good girls, believe what you had to say, and acquiesce to you, the man waving around terms like "Biblical authority." You honestly had the expectation that you could make your critics here shut up. If you didn't have those expectations, you never would have been so arrogant and stupid as to come here.

By now, your expectations have no doubt been revised, somewhat? They still don't appear to be too realistic, as far as I can see. But you do have them, Ken. Yes, you most certainly do.

You are very deceived if you think I thought I could match down with a bunch of angry and upset people.

So, Ken--why are you here, again? You must have thought you could accomplish something by coming here; otherwise, why do it?

(By the way, I'm neither angry nor upset. Amused and contemptuous is more like it.)

I can't stoop that low as I live by a higher standard and values.

You're a child-beater, Ken. You're a rape apologist. You don't treat your wife very well, either; I'd be a vicious monster if I was wholly dependent upon you, too. Frankly, I think you're a Narcissist--I grew up with one, and reading your comments gave me an eerie sense of deja vu. And you're throwing a typical narcissistic tantrum because you are unable to control how we perceive you and what is said here.

[Mama Mia]

Slightly off topic but I have a question. Do people mean they literally wouldn't tell their daughters to stay out of dark alleys and dangerous situations? I completely agree that rape is the fault of the rapist, period. But I also always told my daughters to try not to walk alone at night, to be careful at parties, to not get drunk and wander off alone with someone. Is that somehow wrong? I mean yeah it would be great if the world was 100% safe, but it's not. It seems kind of naive to not be careful of your surroundings and actions and not to tell your kids to becareful.

Fwiw,I told my sons the same sorts of things and actually worried more about them in some ways, as getting jumped by other young men was a real issue.

[ShesCrafty]

Slightly off topic but I have a question. Do people mean they literally wouldn't tell their daughters to stay out of dark alleys and dangerous situations? I completely agree that rape is the fault of the rapist, period. But I also always told my daughters to try not to walk alone at night, to be careful at parties, to not get drunk and wander off alone with someone. Is that somehow wrong? I mean yeah it would be great if the world was 100% safe, but it's not. It seems kind of naive to not be careful of your surroundings and actions and not to tell your kids to becareful.

Fwiw,I told my sons the same sorts of things and actually worried more about them in some ways, as getting jumped by other young men was a real issue.

I don't think anyone is trying to say to not use good judgement; however, what is is considered safe and unsafe is subjective. And any crime committed against a person is the fault of the perpetrator, not the victim, regardless of whether or not that victim put themselves in what some may consider an "unsafe" environment.

I am reminded of an incident that happened a few months ago. A woman was driving drunk and struck a man on a motorcycle. He lived but was badly injured. If this man had been in a car, he would probably not have been injured as badly or at all, the car was going at a fairly slow speed. However, he chose the more dangerous option of driving a motorcycle. Does this mean the drunk driver should not be charged with causing injury to the man and charged only with the DUI? After all, if the man had chosen the safer option (a car), he probably would be okay. Should he share in the responsibility of his physically injuries since he chose to put himself in a more dangerous situation by riding a motorcycle? Or does the fault lie completely with the woman who broke the law by driving drunk? I know who I would blame and it's not the man, despite his placing himself in an unsafe situation by riding a motorcycle.

[miffy]

Slightly off topic but I have a question. Do people mean they literally wouldn't tell their daughters to stay out of dark alleys and dangerous situations? I completely agree that rape is the fault of the rapist, period. But I also always told my daughters to try not to walk alone at night, to be careful at parties, to not get drunk and wander off alone with someone. Is that somehow wrong? I mean yeah it would be great if the world was 100% safe, but it's not. It seems kind of naive to not be careful of your surroundings and actions and not to tell your kids to becareful.

Fwiw,I told my sons the same sorts of things and actually worried more about them in some ways, as getting jumped by other young men was a real issue.

I was once blasted on another forum for saying what you said. I don't see what the problem with telling people to be careful is? It's nothing to do with victim blaming & its not just rape that people need to be careful about.

[formergothardite]

I think there is a difference between telling people to be careful and saying that women should be held hugely responsible for having been raped which is what Ken said. I'm going to tell my daughters to be safe, but if they do get raped I'm not going to be all "Well most of the blame is on you for being there/being drunk/wearing that outfit/going to a party/and the list goes on for reasons women get blamed for their rape."

[Mecca]

I think there is a difference between telling people to be careful and saying that women should be held hugely responsible for having been raped which is what Ken said. I'm going to tell my daughters to be safe, but if they do get raped I'm not going to be all "Well most of the blame is on you for being there/being drunk/wearing that outfit/going to a party/and the list goes on for reasons women get blamed for their rape."

Exactly. Ken is not saying be careful. Ken is saying that women are responsible because they put themselves in a position to be raped. BIG DIFFERENCE. And let's be honest here. Ken and Lori Alexander have some warped views on rape, period. I mean, look at what they believe in regards to marriage and rape. It appears they always take the side of the rapist no matter the circumstance.

[treehugger]

I don't have an issue with parents and guardians telling their daughters to be careful and helping them develope an awareness of safety. I have an issue with every single joe blow bringing it up every time rape is mentioned.

Believe me, Ken. Most women, if not all, know the inherent risk associated with having a female body. We are probably more acutely aware of our safety and surroundings than most men will need to ever be. We know the risks of dark alleys, lonely parking lots, drinks, drugs, and over friendly neighbours. It is the last thing we need to hear when someone mentions rape. A woman can do everything right and horrible things can still happen. We can have discussions about safety - and discussions about rape. But they should not always be the same discussion.

[Full enough quiver]

The night I was raped, I chose to lie to my parents and sneak out. I chose to drink and smoke pot. I chose to dress provocatively and flirt. I made many bad choices that night, but I did not choose to be raped. I did not choose to have my wrist fractured, and my shoulder dislocated.

I do tell my girls to be careful. I still believe that most people are good, but there are people out there that will take advantage of you. Better safe than sorry. If they were raped, it wouldn't be their fault. I would never blame them for the bad actions of a rapist, but I have no problem teaching them to do everything they can to avoid potentially dangerous situations.

[Mama Mia]

I don't have an issue with parents and guardians telling their daughters to be careful and helping them develope an awareness of safety. I have an issue with every single joe blow bringing it up every time rape is mentioned.

Believe me, Ken. Most women, if not all, know the inherent risk associated with having a female body. We are probably more acutely aware of our safety and surroundings than most men will need to ever be. We know the risks of dark alleys, lonely parking lots, drinks, drugs, and over friendly neighbours. It is the last thing we need to hear when someone mentions rape. A woman can do everything right and horrible things can still happen. We can have discussions about safety - and discussions about rape. But they should not always be the same discussion.

I agree with all of that, except the part about men not needing to be aware of their safety and surroundings. Maybe it varies depending on where you are....but my sons out at night meant a huge fear ( and risk ) of being attacked for wearing the wrong color in the wrong part of town, or not " claiming" whatever idiot gang someone wanted them to say. ( claiming was put in scare quotes because it's scary ). Or, if they were drinking, mouthing off to the wrong person, who maybe has a gun. Or riding a cool bike or skate that someone else decides they'll take- by force- and that they'll get injured in the resulting fight. And on and on.and this wasn't paranoia, there were enough actual incidents to make the fear real.

[treehugger]

I agree with all of that, except the part about men not needing to be aware of their safety and surroundings. Maybe it varies depending on where you are....but my sons out at night meant a huge fear ( and risk ) of being attacked for wearing the wrong color in the wrong part of town, or not " claiming" whatever idiot gang someone wanted them to say. ( claiming was put in scare quotes because it's scary ). Or, if they were drinking, mouthing off to the wrong person, who maybe has a gun. Or riding a cool bike or skate that someone else decides they'll take- by force- and that they'll get injured in the resulting fight. And on and on.and this wasn't paranoia, there were enough actual incidents to make the fear real.

Of course. I understand completely that many men are also subject to abuse and violence because of the colours they wear or the colour of their skin. It is all wrong and horrible. And male rape is as appalling as female rape (and it is truly sad that there are so few resources to help those who are affected by sexual abuse). I apologize for wording that wrong. It was not my intent to minimize the issues that face so many men.

[OkToBeTakei]

I think there is a difference between telling people to be careful and saying that women should be held hugely responsible for having been raped which is what Ken said. I'm going to tell my daughters to be safe, but if they do get raped I'm not going to be all "Well most of the blame is on you for being there/being drunk/wearing that outfit/going to a party/and the list goes on for reasons women get blamed for their rape."

The really really sad thing is that I will have to teach my daughter that unlike all the wonderful males in her life who would realise that a scantily clad drunk young girl acting provocatively is vulnerable and needs protecting from herself never mind would be sex offenders but also needs protection from people who have attitudes like Ken.

I'm still too gobsmacked to comment on the fact that Ken has equated his experience of people disagreeing with him to rape.

Tell me that did not happen? That's not normal right?

Hug me :cry:

[J'ean Skirt]

The really really sad thing is that I will have to teach my daughter that unlike all the wonderful males in her life who would realise that a scantily clad drunk young girl acting provocatively is vulnerable and needs protecting from herself never mind would be sex offenders but also needs protection from people who have attitudes like Ken.

This was my failure. I'd been raised around men who actually believed in permission and consent. They respected my boundaries, both those I stated directly and those that I set non-verbally. Then I met a man who did not respect either set of boundaries. That was a wakeup call. I expected that when I said "It's new year's eve, I am not going to make you drive home over an hour after midnight. You can sleep on the couch here. This is not some coy way of inviting you to sleep with me, i'm just worried about you on the roads with random drunk people," that was stating a clear boundary and it would be respected. I was wrong.

If it matters, he's not the first nor the last man I made that kind of statement to ("You can stay on the couch..."). He is the only one who raped me. My behavior was the same in all the cases. Only one man assaulted me. Did I take a risk? Yes. But my risk was expecting men would treat me like a human being. And, most of them did.

Ken, and people like him, are dangerous because they would blame me for not knowing that B. was a rapist and that it wasn't safe to let him stay over. "You should have known." Well, I'd done the same thing with other men who weren't rapists and was safe.

The one man I met after the rape invited me to come visit him in another city. He offered me a couch in his place and I (with a lot of fear and trepidation) said I'd feel more comfortable staying in a hotel. He didn't even blink and came up with a list of places near his that I could stay at. That boundary? Respected immediately, nothing like "you don't trust me? I'm safe" just "Absolutely! Here are options." Things changed and he ended up visiting me first and did stay on my couch, but I felt safer about it because he was so respectful of boundaries (and he did. And then I married him.)

I'm still too gobsmacked to comment on the fact that Ken has equated his experience of people disagreeing with him to rape.

Tell me that did not happen? That's not normal right?

Hug me :cry:

Unfortunately, it is normal for some group of men (and to be fair, women) who want to absolve themselves of any responsibility for their actions. They want to be able to say and do whatever it is they want to do without any consequences. If they blame women, then they can be whatever kind of assholes they want to be and it's Not Their Fault. It's the fault of the evil harlot for defrauding them.

Yeah. Grow up and keep it in your pants. A naked, drunk woman is not an invitation.

[formergothardite]

The really really sad thing is that I will have to teach my daughter that unlike all the wonderful males in her life who would realise that a scantily clad drunk young girl acting provocatively is vulnerable and needs protecting from herself never mind would be sex offenders but also needs protection from people who have attitudes like Ken.

I'm still too gobsmacked to comment on the fact that Ken has equated his experience of people disagreeing with him to rape.

Tell me that did not happen? That's not normal right?

Hug me :cry:

For many places it is normal to blame women, but I don't think it is normal to act that being disagreed with on the internet is the same as rape. The point I was trying to make with Ken(and perhaps I should have been more clear with a person like him) was that he was claiming women are hugely responsible for something as horrible as rape while he absolves himself of any responsibility for having his wife(who supposedly submits to him so he could have told her no)blogging with their real names extremely controversial things, him coming here, signing up to be a member of this forum, writing his real name on this forum and then making a ton of posts. We did not force him to do any of this. If someone googles his name and finds out that he has written this stuff it is not because of us, it is because he wrote this stuff using his real name.

Snarky disagreements and using bad language cannot be compared to rape. It honestly never entered my mind that he would be so childish to claim that we are like rapists for disagreeing with him and his wife. Part of posting publically on the internet is that 99% of the time there is going to be at least one person who doesn't agree with you and has no problem telling you that.

[latraviata]

This was my failure. I'd been raised around men who actually believed in permission and consent. They respected my boundaries, both those I stated directly and those that I set non-verbally. Then I met a man who did not respect either set of boundaries. That was a wakeup call. I expected that when I said "It's new year's eve, I am not going to make you drive home over an hour after midnight. You can sleep on the couch here. This is not some coy way of inviting you to sleep with me, i'm just worried about you on the roads with random drunk people," that was stating a clear boundary and it would be respected. I was wrong.

If it matters, he's not the first nor the last man I made that kind of statement to ("You can stay on the couch..."). He is the only one who raped me. My behavior was the same in all the cases. Only one man assaulted me. Did I take a risk? Yes. But my risk was expecting men would treat me like a human being. And, most of them did.

Ken, and people like him, are dangerous because they would blame me for not knowing that B. was a rapist and that it wasn't safe to let him stay over. "You should have known." Well, I'd done the same thing with other men who weren't rapists and was safe.

The one man I met after the rape invited me to come visit him in another city. He offered me a couch in his place and I (with a lot of fear and trepidation) said I'd feel more comfortable staying in a hotel. He didn't even blink and came up with a list of places near his that I could stay at. That boundary? Respected immediately, nothing like "you don't trust me? I'm safe" just "Absolutely! Here are options." Things changed and he ended up visiting me first and did stay on my couch, but I felt safer about it because he was so respectful of boundaries (and he did. And then I married him.)

Unfortunately, it is normal for some group of men (and to be fair, women) who want to absolve themselves of any responsibility for their actions. They want to be able to say and do whatever it is they want to do without any consequences. If they blame women, then they can be whatever kind of assholes they want to be and it's Not Their Fault. It's the fault of the evil harlot for defrauding them.

Yeah. Grow up and keep it in your pants. A naked, drunk woman is not an invitation.

It was a huge issue in my boys upbringing. Not just the talk, but by osmosis, the emphasis on no is no, respect for women in general and e.g. observing how their father treated their mother. Very important!